Bismarck weekly tribune., 1887-12-23

Building, New York. AL 8dvertiSem ntS Tor the
TRIBUNE from points east of Illinois should be
sent to him. e'.
NOT PURELY A LOCAL ISSUE
f The st. Paul Dispatch makes the mis-
take Of assuming that the result of the
recent election is morally binding on the
territory. The Dispatch does not seem
to distinguish between an election au-
thorized by a territorial legislature on
this question and one authorized by con-
gress. By the act of the legislature, au-
thorizing the holding of this election, at
least $4,000 of the peoples money has
been squandered in the various coun-
ties squandered, because the result only
demonstrates sentiment, and congress
is in no way bound to respect it. It can
not be truthfully denied that it was a
one-sided cam paign from the start, the
anti-divisionists holding to the theory
that the election not being authorized by
congress, the result would have no bind
ing or moral effect whatever. Notwith-
standing this feeling, so unpopular was
the division movement that only a bare
majority vote was polled in favor of the
proposition. Divisionists now see and
admit that further efforts for dismem-
berment will prove futile. Colonel
Plummer and other strong advocates
who took the stump in favor of the
cause are now free to say that, having
everything their own way in the cam
paign, they are the more disappointed at
the result. Division is dead, very dead,
and has been so ever since the visit of
the Dakota delegation to Washington in
1882. Congressman Springer is right
when he says that the proposition to
divide Dakota is not purely local one,
concerning only the people of Dakota.
The people Of every state are equally
interested in this question. The letter
from Congressman Springer read before
the Aberdeen convention elected much
applause, and may be fairly considered
as reflex of the sentiment at Washing
ton on the division question. He says:
This is the first concerted movement on
the part of the people of Dakota, for single
statehood, which has come to my knoWl-
edge. Heretofore the organized efforts of
your people have been in the direction of
division OF the territory into two parts,
while individuals, certain localities and
newspapers in the territory have opposed
such efforts. These conJending factions
among your own people have had the in
evitable result of preventing any afirma-
tive action whatever by congress. Some
OF your citizens seem to entertain the idea
that the question Of division Of the terri
the people Of Dakota. This is great mis-
take. The people of every state in the
union are equally Interested in this ques
ito !, and it is no more question to be left
to the decision of the people of the terri
tory than would be the question of divid-
ing the state OF Florida and erecting two
states out of the territory comprised with
in its present limits. The average popula-
tion Of the existing states in the union ex-
ceeds 100000. Dakota at this time does
not claim to have a population exceeding
100000. Hence, at present, on the ground
OF population there is no we'll founded rea-
son for her insisting upon the formation
OF two states out of her present territory.
or for giving the people within her limits
four senators in the senate of the United
States, while the state of Illinois with
three millions and the state of New York
with five millions of people have but two
senators each.
Under section 8 of article of the con-
stltutiOn OF the United States no new state
can be formed or erected within the juris-
diction Of any other state without the con-
sent OF the legislature of such state as
well as of the congress. Those who are
claiming for Dakota the right to divide her
into two states are claiming a greater
power for the territory than. any state in
ever, if at any time in the future the peo-
pie OF Dakota become so numerous, that
their material interests would be best sub
served by division, the legislature of the
state and the congress of the United States
acting in conjunction can secure such di-
vision. Those who are welded to the idea
OF division may well postpone the reaiiza-
tion OF their hopes until more convenient
season. For can assure them from my
knowledge of public sentiment here, that
the division OF Dakota at this time and the
erection OF two states within her borders
is utterly. impossible.
:. have been assailed in some quarters
for having opposed the admission of Da-
k ia into the union. Such criticisms are
unjust and without foundation. [ have
earnestly desired and still desire the ad-
mission of Dakota into the union as one
state; but have opposed and will con-
tinue to oppose her disnemberment.
While some Of her cilizens, perhaps, inter
ested in certain localities that may be af-
fected by division, may criticise my course
at this time, yet feel assured that here
after, those who have insisted upon single
adlnis ion will be regarded as the bene-
factors of the territory. After Dakota
shall have been admitted into the union,
and taken her place in the sisterhood of
states, the magnitude Of her domain, the
greatness Of her resources and the cour-
age and indOmitable pluck of her people
will inspire in every citizen just and
laudable pride. 1t will be the boast of
the thousands and perhaps millions of our
citizens who may hereafter reside within
your Jurisdiction that they are the citizens
OF great state, and dinnational conventions
OF political parties, In the halls Of congress
and In the commercial bodies of the world
her representatives will be accorded that
distinguished position which the import
ance OF the state will demand. | have
faith In the future of Dakota. She Is
destined to take her place very soon in the
galaxy OF Our states as one of the greatest
and most prosperous OF the union.
therefore bid you GOdspeed In the work
OF the convention OF tho 18th OF December,